*TW* Pedophile found guilty of raping 5 year old given a SUSPENDED SENTENCE

[SebastianTheCrab]

How? How??

If anyone knows how I can donate to the mum's bid to challenge his sentence in the High Court please tell me.

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8843789/Mother-devastated-paedophile-walked-free-court-raping-five-year-old-daughter.html

I wonder if a failure in his care plan or the care around him was a major contributer to the incident. If he doesn’t have capacity a strategy and support should have been in place to prevent raping a 5 year old. The rape incident wouldn’t have come out of the blue. Social services, LA, carers, family would have been aware of his attraction to minors and should have been managing him through an agreed care plan. Secure supported accommodation or consistent 1:1 support with immediate police intervention should have been in place to prevent the rape of a 5 year old.

NOBODY IS SAYING THAT IT IS OKAY! Nobody is being a rape apologist.
This is truly appalling
People are looking at this to try to understand the legal reasons why ‘mitigation’ would apply - not because THEY think that it would actually mitigate the horror of what’s happened to that wee girl! Very little useful information has been published - people are wondering what legal justification there could be for this disgusting excuse of a sentence.
Just because some people are asking questions or making statements from that angle does not make them any less angry. If there is legal mitigation to enable such a lenient sentence then the law is an ass and a disgrace and needs tackling at the root cause to change

Thank you for the address and template.

He lives right by several schools one if the locals said his garden is right by the playground its no wonder he has been hounded out

@Aridane

You would think so, wouldn't you? Raping a child - though if he was placed in custody, what's the odds it would be a woman's prison?

Unlikely since he is a man and not a TW

I misunderstood the TW in the title, too.

Apologies.

Thank you @NiceGerbil exactly!

@DirtyDeeds you say People are looking at this to try to understand the legal reasons why ‘mitigation’ would apply
Several pps including myself have clarified that there is no mitigation in sentencing guidelines of this crime on the basis that the penetration of the victim’s body with the penis was ‘accidental’ or in some way ‘less serious than normal rape‘. It’s actually quite disturbing that you think there might be. So it is a form a rape apology to speculate reasons on this basis. One might equally ask what she was wearing or what the weather was like that day as both have equal relevance to any mitigation in law. To be clear, none.

The sentence may have been mitigated by his alleged learning difficulties. Although, as many pps have commented, if he committed the crime because of these difficulties, there needs to be some kind of provision to protect the public from his actions. And that does not appear to have been put in place. And this is where the judgment appears to be lacking. Either he is capable of controlling his actions and therefore the sentencing is unduly lenient. Or he is incapable of controlling his actions and needs to be kept securely away from the public for their protection and his own. Until the judgment is made available we will be in the dark on what has gone wrong here.

Do you think @mumsnetHQ would replace the tw in the title with the words trigger warning? Its causing confusion?

He was also given a 35 day rehabilitation order. Again if learning difficulties are the issue why does the judge think he's capable of benefitting from this particularly as he doesn't even know what it will consist of. These kinds of intervention have no track record for sex offenders.

'The Rehabilitation Activity Requirement (RAR) was introduced by the Offender Rehabilitation Act 2014. It is a single new requirement that the court can include as part of a participants Community Sentence. The court when allocating a RAR is not prescriptive in what the participant must do but will specify a maximum number of activity days the participant must complete. The participants Responsible Officer will decide the activities the participant is required to attend based on individual need and creating a safer community.'

'The RAR is designed to allow flexibility of what services/interventions we can choose to deliver to participants. Using innovative and rehabilitative approaches we can address the individuals needs and change the pattern of offending behaviour and issues that lead to this. Engaging with partnership agencies, volunteers and their Reponsible Officer activities in the RAR can include, addressing Housing issues, Finances, Health and Wellbeing, engaging with the local community through Social Action projects and many more.'

@slipperywhensparticus

Do you think *@mumsnetHQ* would replace the tw in the title with the words trigger warning? Its causing confusion?

What was the tw ref though?

@PastMyBestBeforeDate

How is someone with severe enough LDs to 'excuse' raping a little girl expected to pay £2500 in fines? That (amongst the ridiculousness of it all) seems bizarre? Is it £1 a week for years and years? Either he has capacity to pay the fine, stand trial and be imprisoned or he needs to be in a secure unit.

From the photograph of him unless he has private family money he didn't look as if he would have the earning capacity to pay that.

What was the tw ref though?

Presumably "trigger warning" ? Completely necessary given the rest of the thread title and tbh a bit crass given what TW usually stands for on here.

Completely unnecessary

Yes I read the case and realised it was a different ‘ta’ meaning but was trying to think what it was. That makes sense .

Ta - my autocorrect has a mind of its own

@FairFriday

Ta - my autocorrect has a mind of its own

It certainly does !

Why was that comment deleted?!

I can't remember what your comment was.

I reported the opening post and suggested the "tw" should be removed. It's completely unnecessary given what appears in the rest of the title and a bit crass given what TW usually stands for but MNHQ seem happy with it.

I can’t remember either but remember I did think ‘that’s going to go pufffffft’. Sorry, no help. Email MNHQ and ask.

I was saying clearly that the sentence was shocking and also wondering what - if any - legal mitigation could there possibly be for such a lenient sentence. And if there is any legal mitigation then the law is an ass
I’m not sure how that could possibly make me a rape apologist nor how anyone could have said I was trying to justify the sentence given

I have sent this email today:-
FAO The Rt Hon Suella Braverman QC

I am writing to request that you review the sentence handed down to Callum Haycock at Worcester Crown Court on 1st October, for the rape of a 5 year old child. He was sentenced to just 3 years community service, with 5 years on the Sexual Offenders Register. There was no custodial sentence.

This sentencing level is grossly inadequate for an adult convicted of extreme sexual violence towards a very young child. It does not begin to reflect the seriousness of the offence, it cannot serve as any deterrent to others, and it does not even adequately provide for proper levels of oversight and monitoring in the years ahead. I therefore believe that this sentence is unduly lenient. I ask that this case be referred to the Court of Appeal.

I would further request that a full investigation take place into the Judge's ability to hold such a highly respected and powerful position. The very fact that he/she believed that this was an appropriate sentence to hand down for a crime as heinous as this one is to say the least highly questionable. The justice system has failed this little girl and her family, an appalling travesty of justice, it is therefore of utmost importance that this be reviewed and corrected as a matter of urgency.

I look forward to hearing from you shortly.

Kindest regards.

* Edited by MNHQ to remove name* **

@tinabr you’ve left your name in there!!

I’m withholding judgement on wether this is appropriate sentence or not. If his behaviour was a direct result of poor support or poor care plan and he was known not to have capacity, then the system is at fault and professionals should be held accountable

For all those of you following this thread - good news! The attorney general has referred this case for sentence review - so all you people who were thinking that there might be mitigating factors (which I still cannot understand) - hopefully Callum Haycock will be thrown in prison and the key thrown away.... (with a bit of luck the judge will get booted out too).

www.gov.uk/government/statistical-data-sets/outcome-of-unduly-lenient-sentence-referrals